Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Semper Paratus Responds to Sami Zaatari

Semper Paratus, a frequent guest on this blog, has just posted a response to Sami Zaatari's "refutation" of the doctrine of the Trinity.

Whatever Zaatari thinks he has shown, I must confess at the outset, if he did not say in the article that he was attacking the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, I would have thought that his article was against Mormonism or some other heretical perversion of the Biblical faith. The fact is, the idea that God is "made up of three people", as Zaatari styles it, and that this is, pardon the grammatically awkward and theologically repugnant expression, "basically exactly like having 3 people in an office, Tom Dick and Harry", is hardly something that any orthodox Christian would recognize as the teaching of the Bible or as the God that he or she seeks to love with all his or her heart, soul, mind, and strength. Indeed, take away the Christian terminology of “Father, Son, and Holy Spirit”, which Sami grafted onto his counterfeit description of the Christian God, and substitute other more appropriate names in their place – such as al-Lat, al-Uzza, and Manat – and what Sami has described looks more like the gods that Islam’s prophet once proclaimed at the prompting of Satan than it does anything like the God of Christianity. Read more.

184 comments:

I should add that I usually put articles about Islam up on my blog until Jochen has a chance to edit them and put them up on the Answering Islam site. In other words, at some point my post will direct people to Answering Islam to read the entire article.

Semper wrote: “Presumably that means it is open season on Christians, and the wonderful blessing of Dhimi status may be dutifully denied to Christian’s in Muslim lands”

This is particularly interesting. The way Muslims will re-interpret and thus contradict their holy book all the time. It is obvious that Allah doesn’t regard Christians, along with Jews, as polytheists. But today’s Muslims will try their best to show that we are “mushrikin”. Of course this has to do with two things:

1. The Quran is simply ignorant of what others believe.2. Muslims feel the danger that Christians pose to their faith and use the strongest accusation in the propaganda machine to scare off monotheists to prevent them to join our faith, which is polytheism.

They know that NO Muslims will even be appealed to any belief that promotes polytheism. So they will go out of their way to try to pin polytheism on the Messianic faith. And, as usual, they don’t think anything of contradicting their god and repudiating his words in the process.

Just like they re-interpret the term “son of God” to make it mean something totally different than the Qur’an says. Clearly when the Qur’an attacks the phrase “son of God” it means physical descendants. But Muslims will say “oh… it just means servant of God” as to say that Yeshua was saying that he was just a servant of God, just to make the NT compatible with Islam. Well, then, if Muslims will be consistent (which is hardly ever) they will have to explain Surah 6:101 where Allah apparently says that he has no servants because he doesn’t have a wife. Or that Surah 4:171 says that it’s far removed from his glory that he should have a servant.

Bassam Zawadi tries to be accurate when he discusses Christian doctrine. (He even corrected a Christian once when we were on the radio.) He's one of the only Muslims I know of who tries to be accurate.

This is a really good refutation of the argument presented by Sami Zaatari. Sami's argument wasn't exactly clearcut and was based on a number of misconceptions of our understanding of the Trinity. I've heard many different explanations of the Trinity from a Muslim perspective, but I think this is the first I've heard that one (especially in using the crude analogy of three separate workers in comparison to the Trinity!). Again, this is an excellent rebuttal to the argument. (Great work Semper Paratus!)

You said: "The fact is, the idea that God is "made up of three people", as Zaatari styles it, and that this is, pardon the grammatically awkward and theologically repugnant expression, "basically exactly like having 3 people in an office, Tom Dick and Harry", is hardly something that any orthodox Christian would recognize as the teaching of the Bible or as the God that he or she seeks to love with all his or her heart, soul, mind, and strength."

During brother Sami's debate with Sam Shamoun, this point was brought up in the book of Revelation of Jesus being in his human form and making Prayer to GOD Almighty after he was raised to GOD Almighty in Heaven. Sam Shamoun said that Jesus is the "God-man", which is why he remains in his human-form.

So yes, trinity is not about One GOD Almighty is three forms. It is about three distinct entities.

Now ironically, in the book of Revelations, we do also read about the 7 spirits of GOD Almighty, which makes me wonder why isn't your polytheism based on a sevenity instead of just a trinity.

the reasons why some muslims 'misunderstand' your trinity is simple. Even the christians cannot agree on a definition or proper explanation of trinity.. as Deedat once said, if you ask 10 diffrent christians 'what is trinity' you are likely to get 10 diffrent answeres...

islam offers pure monotheism, not some confused mumbo jumbo triune godhead sharing agreement - no matter how u dress it up or what fancy words are used in explaining it

I agree that the Trinity is more complex than Tauheed. And I agree that lots of different Christians disagree on some of the details (mind you, most orthodox scholars don't).

But what every Christian will agree with is that the concept of Trinity entails ONE GOD, but yet Muslims will misrepresent this as three gods.

So what happens to your "Christians don't even agree!" argument? It's a moot point that does not apply. All Christians agree, there is one God, yet Muslims cannot understand that this is what we believe.

Osama said,So yes, trinity is not about One GOD Almighty is three forms. It is about three distinct entities.

Using ambiguous language isn't going to help your case. What exactly is a 'form' and what is an 'entity' if you'd like to use Trinitarian language we can. The fact is that without redefining what Christians mean you cannot cogently mount an attack, which is why we see such nonsense from Zatari.Now ironically, in the book of Revelations, we do also read about the 7 spirits of GOD Almighty, which makes me wonder why isn't your polytheism based on a sevenity instead of just a trinity.

More futile arguments. The book of Revelation is written in a certain form - apocalyptic. Which is riddled with symbols. Way to show you don't know what you're talking about.

Finally stop acting as if you Muslims have a monopoly on monotheism, the fact is we are not arguing monotheism vs polytheism, but Unitarian Monotheism vs Trinitarian Monotheism. Any other assertion that the Trinity is a form of polytheism only demonstrates the lack of honesty in the apologists of Allah.

Khayyam,Islam offers pure monotheism, not some confused mumbo jumbo triune godhead sharing agreement - no matter how u dress it up or what fancy words are used in explaining it

So what if Islam offers 'pure' monotheism, who cares? That isn't the argument and we don't test the validity of religions on the basis of their 'pure monotheism' also, what is 'pure' about your monotheism over Jewish monotheism? Christianity offers 'pure' monotheism too, in the Trinitarian sense and we don't have to dumb it down for simpletons who don't care to think. The fact remains that Christians have a consistent view of God, and Islamic attacks on the doctrine of the Trinity have been locked in the vault of failed arguments against the Christian faith. Please, do us a favor and keep them there.

I believe that a large percentage of Muslims seek to prove the Trinity as false out of simple belief in the truth of Islam and a desire to lead us to the truth.

However, I also believe that some have a more sininster motive. Namely, they realize what the Quran says about "mushrikun" and they want Christians labeled as polytheists so the verses about the mushrikun can be applied to us (i.e. At-Taubah 9:5).

El-Cid... yes... that's a sinister possibility... and beinfg theire caus defended bie people lihe Ousama is very dangerous because they don't garsp anything about Christianity,,, and Ousama, with all the lack of knowlege, is a learned people... imagine the millions of muslims around the worls who onlie know nothing...

I am truly surprised. It looks like all the Christians liked my article, and all the Muslims didn't. Did anyone else see that coming?

In all seriousness, it seems Osama is still having some trouble arriving at an accurate understanding of what Christians believe, but it looks like everyone else beat me to the punch. (If I have missed anything Osama, please point it out to me).

No, I have never been a Coast Guard. In fact, I was a little bit dejected that the Guard already had dibs on the domain name. That is why my blog has the less memorable Smprparatus, instead of Semperparatus. I chose the name because it is Latin for Always Ready (as in 1 Peter 3:15).

El Cid wrote: “However, I also believe that some have a more sininster motive. Namely, they realize what the Quran says about "mushrikun" and they want Christians labeled as polytheists so the verses about the mushrikun can be applied to us (i.e. At-Taubah 9:5).”

Which is exactly what I said yesterday in the Muslim Christian dialogue room on Paltalk. When the Muslims tried to pin polytheism on us, I challenged one Muslim to tell us why the Qur’an fails to label us as “mushrikin” and explicitly separates from that category. I pointed out that they yet again contradict their own book. But to quench the threat of Christianity, they will go out of their way, contradict Allah and repudiate the teachings of their own book.

But guys, there is a Muslim FIRST! Yesterday, I challenged Sami in the dialogue room to explain John 1:1-3. He simply refused to do so and claimed that John is just an opinion and that the entire book of John is invalid and thus cannot be used for evidence that Yeshua said anything or did anything. They have thrown the Gospel of John on the same pile as the letters of Paul.

I have a suggestion for anyone that debates Sami if he keeps this up: Don’t recognize any Hadith from the 8th century on as valid, no matter how “sound” they think their isnads are. Don’t accept any tafsir as valid. Those sources cannot be trusted due to their late dates. Sami should build his case from the Qur’an and the Qur’an alone. And even then, we should disregard any ayah that he comes up with that seems to substantiate his case, since Uthmann might have inserted it and we can’t tell if it’s authentic since he burned all the original manuscripts. Furthermore, we should pull out Ibn Ishaq and Al-Tabari and put all the atrocities out there.

See how they like their sources manhandled like they do to our sources.

the reasons why some muslims 'misunderstand' your trinity is simple. Even the christians cannot agree on a definition or proper explanation of trinity.. as Deedat once said, if you ask 10 diffrent christians 'what is trinity' you are likely to get 10 diffrent answeres...

Elijah wrote:

Interesting, the Qur'an presents a view of the Trinity that differs from all the Christian views in general.

Are you saying that the author of the Qur'an was confused since the Christians of the time were not in agreement about the definition?

hmm sounds like a clear pointer that the author of the Qur'an was not God!

Well there is a possibility that a group named the Chloridians, which was a feminist Christian sect located the Arabic dessert in the fifth century did elevate Mary to a divine position (unless I am wrong about some of the details).

But I am not totally sure whether the Chloridians existed in Muhammad's time even though the ideas might have flourished.

But in that case we can prove that the author of the Qur'an was indeed dependent upon the sources of the dessert (that certainly solves dependence not upon a heavenly revelation but what that the author was acquainted with).

But then again, even though the author of the Qur'an did utilize the sources of the Chloridians it still does not solve the problem that the author of the Qur'an was confused due to his misunderstanding of Christian definition.

If you are into source studies and history, this reveals a serious problem with the common claim that the Qur'an was entirely revealed by God.

Hogan saide: «group named the Chloridians, which was a feminist Christian sect located the Arabic dessert in the fifth century did elevate Mary to a divine position»...

yep... you're true about thate... Al-Amigdala was a key priestess in that movement until she was killed bie Al-Ahsoka Tano... A top christin schollar, Steven McLucas (I think it's well spelled...) wrote a book about themm: "The first disturbance in the Love"...

I don't agree with many of it's positions, expecially when he says Al-Amigdala was ressurected from the deade... there're no single historical evidences of that...

Unfortunately I have not done any proper studies on the Chloridians, I am still stuck with the Gnostic movements of the second century and the intellectual battle between them and the Christians of orthodoxy.

The Gnostic ideas and worldview are unbelievably complex and detailed; I doubt anyone has truly grasped the the full picture of their belief and there were many factions, which does not make the research easier.

Their ideas certainly flourished in the dessert, and there are clear evidences of their impact on the Qur'an.

But I am sure we can look into it, in the nearest future.

It would not surprise me though that there might be a link between Gnosticism and the Chloridians, especially the elevation of Mary being a god. We have to grasp that according to many Gnostics the universe was created by a lesser divine male-animal being created by Sophie the last god in the emanated process. Whether some Gnostics combined Mary and Sophie is not at all surprising to me; but we need to probe into this.

The main idea of the Gnostics contemplated that Jesus was purely divine and spiritual, which was why they rejected his death on the cross. Some of them would therefore separate between Jesus and Christ, Jesus being the human whom the divine Christ possessed and others claimed that Judas was crucified in the look of Jesus, while the spiritual Jesus escaped to heaven. This later which resembles the Qur'an is purely logical in Gnosticism since Gnostics favoured a secret truth only available for a few, namely the divine sparks dwelling among the rest of humanity who are creations of the demiurge the creation of Sophie. This simply does not fit islam in which the messaga and salvation is open for all.

Nakdimon said: "But guys, there is a Muslim FIRST! Yesterday, I challenged Sami in the dialogue room to explain John 1:1-3. He simply refused to do so and claimed that John is just an opinion and that the entire book of John is invalid and thus cannot be used for evidence that Yeshua said anything or did anything. They have thrown the Gospel of John on the same pile as the letters of Paul."

I guess that means he won't continue using any "proof texts" from John to try to refute the divinity of Jesus, like he did in his debate with James White.

Muslims should just be consistant and stop quoting from the New Testament to try to disprove Jesus' divinity. We can all see they don't believe a word it says anyway (even the verses they quote). Using it to try to shake the faith of Christians when they think it's all made up (even the verses they quote) is absurd.

Sami in the dialogue room to explain John 1:1-3. He simply refused to do so and claimed that John is just an opinion and that the entire book of John is invalid and thus cannot be used for evidence that Yeshua said anything or did anything. They have thrown the Gospel of John on the same pile as the letters of Paul."

Elijah replies:

I guess then that Sami does not believe that Muhammad was predicted in the Injeel.

Funny because Muslims keep telling us that John's Gospel is a fiction, yet the only alleged prophecy of Muhammad in the Gospels is found in John 14 (or that is what the Muslims want us to believe).

Pay attention Christians

Whenever a Muslim tells you that John is a fictionous document, tell them that the paraclete in John 14 must be fiction and that the Qur'an then basis itself upon fiction, and then the prediction of whoever is coming must be fiction also.

Whenever a muslim tells you that Muhammad is mentioned in John 14, tell him that common consent among Muslims is that John's Gospel is fiction!

Can islam be more contradictory and inconsistent?

If you want further inconsistency then listen to Shabir Ally.

He will openly exclaim that Mark is the more muslim Gospel, that Matthew and Luke are more corruptive and that John's Gospel is the fully Christian Gospel, being fabricated.

Then Shabir Ally without any realization of the absurdity of his proposition will state that John 14 predicts Muhammad.

My question is: why is Muhammad not referred to in Mark (the more muslim gospel)?

It is only in your dreams and Sami's did Shamoun get smoked. And since you can't help yourself from rewriting history I need to mention that Sami came in blaspheming and Shamoun completely crushed him for being a punk for doing that and gave you guys a taste of your own medicine. It is ok for you guys to mock but when a person return the favor you guys can't help but whine like little kids. And since you have amnesia didn't your little puppy take off when he was supposed to also debate Shamoun on why Muhammad is a lying, deceiving prophet who was inspired by a wicked spirit on the same day? So if he crushed Shamoun one wonders why he ran and why you didn't do anything about it.

Since Shamoun manhandled you and your little puppy I can contact Shamoun and ask him to see if he is up to lowering himself in order to debate you again on the topic of Islamic monotheism. Care to debate that? I am sure you would have no problem with accepting it seeing how you and your puppies crushed Shamoun. hehehe

ben Malik: is it true the informationne that is circulation around here and there (I could not find the link I hadd...) that Ousama Abdalla was somesort of a member from a Christian sect that embraced islam due to the influense off Ahmed Deedat?

Fernado, no it's not true. You can't trust much of what Osama says since he has been exposed for being a liar and then covering it up with more lies. Someone who knew some history about Osama says that he had a troubled past growing up, something with his uncle. That event has severely affected his emotional and mental state. You can see it in his fascination with sex in the Bible and trying to find it in every place or verse he can.

David and Nabeel, can you please open a board/page about "Does Trinity or Polytheism exist in Islam?" ?

Sam Shamoun, I will silence you and your trinity in Islam lie with this Noble Verse:

[005:017] Those who said that the Messiah, (Jesus), son of Mary is God Himself (or god incarnate) have indeed committed a sacrilege. Say, “Does anyone possess even a bit of power to do anything against Allah? What if He wants to destroy the Messiah, (Jesus) son of Mary, his mother and all the living beings on the surface of the earth? The heavens and the earth and all else in between belong to Allah. He creates what He wills, and Allah is able to will everything!”

Allah Almighty can destroy your Jesus Christ in a milli of a milli of a milli second.

You said: "Someone who knew some history about Osama says that he had a troubled past growing up, something with his uncle."

Yeah, this is what you told me and brother Sami Zaatari during the days when we recorded your foul mouth and foul behaviour. You said that me and Sami got raped by our uncles during our youths. And now, you are lying to Fernando by saying that you heard from a source that I got raped.

The reader can visit: www.answering-christianity.com/dumpster_section.htm to see what type of filthy street trash Sam Shamoun really is.

By the way, I have saved this exchange, and WILL FURTHER ADD IT TO EXPOSE YOU.

I, as almost everyone arounde here, had noticed something wrong, but never, ever, could imagyne suche thing... I'll be eben more carefull in aboiding touching sexual orientated exchange off wordes with him...

another motive to us restart oure chain of prayers for Osama (I realized I've beeng writibg his name phoneticalie for a long time now... sorrie aboute that Osama...).

Ousama: sorrie to have been unoticed of youre probleme... I also had a difficult childhood: I only had mie first book when I was 12... that's when I started learning how to read and write... and now I can anderstand and writte (sometimes bery bad as with mie english...) in 12 idioms... so, Osamma, our bad experiences in the past had unitied us eben more...

Mie hearte in profoundlie with you: may the grace of our God Jesus Christ helpe you!

Osama: ben malik (and I'm sure ben is not sam... he never said he was...) did not mention "rape"... another "lapsus linguae" from you?!?

You have to be more careful... this things can destroy someone's reputation and honour… and, now, even if this is not true, the fact is it became recorded in the NET that you made a dramatic "lapsus linguae"… be careful…

Did I silence you about trinity existing in Islam? Why are you now going around lying about me and my childhood? Are you trying to burry my post that had silenced you?

Here is what Allah Almighty Said again:

[005:017] Those who said that the Messiah, (Jesus), son of Mary is God Himself (or god incarnate) have indeed committed a sacrilege. Say, “Does anyone possess even a bit of power to do anything against Allah? What if He wants to destroy the Messiah, (Jesus) son of Mary, his mother and all the living beings on the surface of the earth? The heavens and the earth and all else in between belong to Allah. He creates what He wills, and Allah is able to will everything!”

According to the Holy Quran, Allah Almighty can destroy Jesus Christ in a second.

Therefore, there is no polytheism in Islam, and Christ is not Allah Almighty as you claim.

«(Osama) says that he had a troubled past growing up, something with his uncle»...

where is "rape" mentioned? Why do you called me a “liar” or a “wolf”? Are you going to start with your insulting tactic?

Everyone can real ben’s words…

Do you assume the fact that every problem that can direct to a dysfunctional sexuality, full of problems of identity and lack of affection, are due to rape?

They are not… someone who, for instance, had a person in his family that he always saw eating chocolate without being given even a small piece of it will grow up to be a person that will masturbate him(her)self with compulsion… may that be in China, Mozambique, Iran or México… that’s a fact… more: if a girl don’t eat enough bread (of wheat) when she grows up she’ll always have a small clitoris and develop an aversion to men… another fact…

So Osama: ben did not say you were rapped… the first person around here who mentioned that word was you… once again: be careful with those “lapsi linguae” …

Playing games again, are we? Go to the www.answering-christianity.com/dumpster_section.htm and read his comments about me getting raped by my uncle.

I know you're not stupid. You're just being a liar.

Anyway, as always, I'll let the reader decide who won and who lost, and who is the liar and who isn't. Shamoun got silenced from one post and ran with his tail between his legs. This is a fact that no one can deny here. His trinity in Islam had been destroyed in a second here.

Sam Shamoun (ben Malik) is blind. Don't follow him. He'll only mislead you and have you believe in things that are unfounded and ridiculous. Look at him. He ran with his tail between his legs after one post from me.

Osama: I didn't go to your site... I didn't reed what you mentioned before you posted the link now… Now I have… but once again: you're building a storm in a glass of water just assuming Sam Shamoun is ben malik... how do you know that? And how can he, or you, prove that you have bee, or not, raped? That's not the case here... lets forget about that... ok? If you have been raped, that's awful… absolutely awful…; if that's not the case, then you don't need to be worried: your manhood is intact; just let it go… will you?

p.s.: I don’t agree about your interpretation of the outcome of your debate…

See guys what I said about Osama being troubled? And notice how he pretty much let the cat out of the bag. Did I say anything about rape? Not a word and yet Osama jumped up and down, ranted and raved like a madman!.

And you said that Shamoun commented that Sami got raped by his uncle. Can you please document your charge since I would love to hear or read it for myself. Knowing the kind of lying blaspheming conniver that you are I can't trust anything you say.

BTW, does that mean you are not couragous enough to debate Shamoun on Islam's paganism?

You said: "BTW, does that mean you are not couragous enough to debate Shamoun on Islam's paganism?"

Was it not you who told Ministry to Muslims that you don't want to debate me? I was offered to debate you on the "Is Islam a Monotheistic Religion?", which I've smoked you on already on this board, AND YOU TOLD THEM NO, I DO NOT WANT TO DEBATE OSAMA.

Man, why should we even bother with Ministry to Muslims? How about you and me setup a date and time, on paltalk, to debate Islam and polytheism, and I'll show you what kind of a clown I'll make out of you this time.

Are you up for it?

And by the way, can you answer this for us, since you challenged to debate anyone on polytheism in Islam on this board:

[005:017] Those who said that the Messiah, (Jesus), son of Mary is God Himself (or god incarnate) have indeed committed a sacrilege. Say, “Does anyone possess even a bit of power to do anything against Allah? What if He wants to destroy the Messiah, (Jesus) son of Mary, his mother and all the living beings on the surface of the earth? The heavens and the earth and all else in between belong to Allah. He creates what He wills, and Allah is able to will everything!”

You said that in Islam Jesus Christ is the same as Allah. Show us how this is true here.

EVERYBODY, I BEG YOU AND ASK YOU IN THE NAME OF WHAT IS DEAR TO YOU, Leave this between me and him for few posts! Please do not comment.

Instead of trying to change topics since you know you can't defend your religion let me ask you to explain to us the reason why Muhammad kissed a black stone when this is expressly forbidden in the "corrupt" Old Testament. And then address Umar's comments that he wouldn't kiss a stone that could neither harm nor benefit anyone if he hadn't seen the pagan Muhammad kissing it (the pagan are my words not Umar's. In light of how hard it is for you to deal honestly with your opponent's statements I had to spell that out. You will do anything to divert attention away from the real topic).

Tell yourself that I accept the debate. And yes, it is you who insists in his papers that Jesus Christ is equal to Allah. Backing away from your position now? It's clear that Noble Verse 5:17 had silenced you.

As to Islam and paganism, I accept. Let's talk about the time and date on paltalk. How is the following weekend sound to you? Or do you want a longer period so we can advertise it longer on our sites?

NOTE TO BE MADE: Sam Shamoun had been silenced from Noble Verse 5:17 about Jesus being Allah in Islam! He wrote several articles about it on his site, and now he got silenced with one Noble Verse.

Let me get this straight if Shamoun agrees to once again manhandle you on the topic on Muhammad being a pagan and passing his idolatry off as monotheism you will accept? So you agree to allow Shamoun to embarrass you like he did in your first debate?

And notice folks how I was talking about Islamic paganism and how Osama ran away from this point to discussing the Trinity. He obviously doesn't want to debate the topic since he knows deep down inside he will further embarrass himself and Mo mo in the process if he does accept.

I already saved all of your posts. So even if you delete them, it's too late.

See people how he is now playing games? He won't commit to a debate because he is scared to get silenced and look very stupid as I did to him using Noble Verse 5:17 earlier.

Now that we've seen how much of a coward and a filthy street trash you are for saying that I got raped from my uncle, let me now smash your sorry points once again to send you home crying this time:

KISSING OF THE BLACK STONE:

The black stone was proven to be a Heavenly astroid that descended to earth and landed in modern-day Mecca. We Muslims believe that it was Allah Almighty's way to determine for Abraham and his son Ishmael, peace be upon them, where to build the House of Allah Almighty, the Kaaba.

So the Heavenly astroid was a gift and a Miracle from Allah Almighty, and that is why the Prophet kissed it. He kissed it because it was a gift and a Miracle from Allah Almighty. Nothing more and nothing less.

As to worshiping idols and bowing to "stones", we do not do that at all. The House of Allah Almighty is what we use to come together and bow to Allah Almighty, as one, in Its direction. The Old Testament Prophets did the same thing:

"I will bow down toward your holy temple and will praise your name for your love and your faithfulness, for you have exalted above all things your name and your word. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 138:2)"

Obviously, Shamoun doesn't think that his Bible's Prophets were idol worshipers in this one, does he?

So now that I've smoked this one for you, can we agree on a time and date?

Your appeal to the "corrupt" Bible to show that the prophets bowed towards the Temple is both desperate and a strawman, and only exposes how inconsistent and irrational you truly are.

First, I am glad you appealed to the Bible to defend Mo mo since that means when we use the Bible to condemn your prophet you cannot simply dismiss it by saying it is corrupted.

Second, I never questioned you concerning Muslims bowing to the Kaba, so that is irrelevant. What I did question is Mo mo kissing a black stone which even troubled his own companion. So can you please provide a verse from the Bible where God enjoined his people to kiss an object that he commissioned?

Third, please provide the pre-Islamic data, whether historical references, inscriptions, archaeological findings, which confirm your claim that Abraham and Ishmael built the Kaba. Muhammad's words don't count as evidence since his integrity is being called into question for rewriting history and also for committing a blatant pagan act of kissing a stone, something Abraham would not have enjoined on his offspring.

And Osama, you are smoking something alright and it ain't Shamoun! hehehe

First of all, I see that you completely disowned and backed away from defending Jesus is Allah in Islam, which I've destroyed for you using Noble Verse 5:17.

Second of all, are you going to commit to a debate as you challenged me, or are you going to back away from this one as well?

Third, my use of the Biblical verses was to further muzzle you mouth about us being pagans for bowing towards the Kaaba, WHEN IN YOUR BOOK Prophets also did it.

Fourth, I don't need to provide a verse from the Bible that allows a kissing of a gift from Allah Almighty, to help us have our Kaaba, His, the Almighty, Grand House to be worshiped in.

Also, so what that the Prophet kissed it? Did he worship it? DID HE UPHOLD IT? Did he say that it was a Sacred Stone? No, none of this.

PAY ATTENTION TO THIS!!!

EVERYONE, ATTENTION TO THIS!!!

On the contrary, Mr. Shamoun, the Prophet Said that to Allah Almighty, the DESTRUCTION OF THE ENTIRE KAABA, is more acceptable than shedding one drop of blood from a Believer! This was for this Noble Verse:

"If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide therein (For ever): And the wrath and the curse of God are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him. (The Noble Quran, 4:93)"

Fifth, as to you rejecting the Hadiths about Abraham and Ishamel building the Kaaba, oh well, we have nothing to debate in this one.

Osama... since you directted your wordes to us all ("Obviously, Shamoun doesn't think that his Bible's Prophets were idol worshipers in this one, does he?"), take notice that:

one thing is to kiss a stone that no one knwes where it came fromm (dispite all the pseudo and apochrfaal stories about it...) and where no one saide, ever, to be a specialle presence of allah, , which is clearly an expression of a idolatric worship of a stone;

and anothere is to bow down to the Temple where YHWH promisede to be presentt with a specialle predilection which is not, bie any means, idolatry... when bowing downtoward the Holy Sacrament present in the Tabernacle, some Christians do not bow to the Tabernacle, but, as they believe, to God present in a special way in it...

Do you grasp the difference?

p.s.: Osama: this snall interbention is juste to help you in arranging your argumentation better... tommorrow I'll be back to se the outcome of your exchange of words with those you tried to sillence...

Let me break this down so you can follow the argument and actually address the point. The Bible is clear that true monotheists do not bow down, kiss, or burn incense to any images, even if they are ones God commanded to be built. See the following verses for documentation - Exodus 20:4-5; Numbers 21:4-9; 1 Kings 19:18; 2 Kings 18:1-4

This means that what Muhammad did in kissing the black stone was an act of worship and is nothing more than idolatry. This further means that Abraham's God had nothing to do with your pagan shrine and your idol stone. Muhammad made all of this lie up.

Now since you appealed to the Bible to prove your case you must now accept it's witness in condemning your pagan stone smooching prophet.

Thanks for once again exposing how inconsistent you are. You referred to hadiths which mention Abraham and Ishmael built the Kaba, even though these were composed centuries after Mo mo's death to prove your case and yet when we use these same hadiths to show all the scientific mistakes, historical blunders, you then condemn them and reject their use.

However, the hadiths are not credible sources when it comes to PRE-ISLAMIC HISTORY. So I again invite you to provide some pre-Islamic references to prove that Abraham and Ishmael went to Mecca to build your pagan temple. Also prove your Allah exists and then prove that he sent this idol stone as a "gift" to your pagan prophet through Abraham.

It is quite apparent and clear that you have lost this debate bad. All of your ranting about us being pagans for bowing to the Kaaba is refuted.

To start out, the Exodus 20:4-5; Numbers 21:4-9; 1 Kings 19:18; 2 Kings 18:1-4 verses that you gave are talking about pagan idols being worshiped like the GOLDEN CALF that the Jews built. This is completely different.

Furthermore, there are COUNTLESS idols of Jesus and Mary all over the Christian world! The Roman Catholics even bow and/or kneel to these idols. SO ARE THEY PAGANS TO YOU?

Furthermore, the Psalms verses that I gave you from your bible further prove that you couldn't escape also CALLING YOUR PROPHETS AS PAGANS:

"I will bow down toward your holy temple and will praise your name for your love and your faithfulness, for you have exalted above all things your name and your word. (From the NIV Bible, Psalm 138:2)"

Furthermore, you said:

"This means that what Muhammad did in kissing the black stone was an act of worship and is nothing more than idolatry. This further means that Abraham's God had nothing to do with your pagan shrine and your idol stone. Muhammad made all of this lie up."

This is only your FORCED INTERPRETATION that is unfounded and baseless. We never worshiped any idol. The Prophet clearly Said:

لئن تهدم الكعبة حجراً حجراً أهون على الله من أن يراق دم امرئ مسلم

(It is much easier on Allah Almighty to destroy the Kaaba than to shed the blood of a Muslim).

As to me proving that Abraham and Ishmael, peace be upon him, built the Kaaba, I don't have any proof on this. But however, it is ironic that this request is coming from one whose entire bible IS DOUBTFUL AND WAS WRITTEN IN UNKNOWN DATES, BY UNKNOWN PEOPLE. The reader can visit:

www.answering-christianity.com/authors_gospels.htm

SHAMOUN DISOWNED JESUS = ALLAH!

Now Shamoun, whatever happened to your proclamation that Jesus Christ is Allah Almighty in Islam? Ever since I responded to you with Noble Verse 5:17, you remained virtually silenced!

[005:017] Those who said that the Messiah, (Jesus), son of Mary is God Himself (or god incarnate) have indeed committed a sacrilege. Say, “Does anyone possess even a bit of power to do anything against Allah? What if He wants to destroy the Messiah, (Jesus) son of Mary, his mother and all the living beings on the surface of the earth? The heavens and the earth and all else in between belong to Allah. He creates what He wills, and Allah is able to will everything!”

ACCORDING TO ISLAM, ALLAH ALMIGHTY can destroy Jesus Christ in a second.

Sam Shamoun, I have recorded all of our posts and will post them on my site for all to see how you have annhialated and silenced in this debate!

YOU ALSO WOULDN'T COMMIT TO A DATE AND TIME to debate, which ironically you have challenged me on here before everyone.

For the bloggers notice once again Osama's lies and distortions of my arguments:

"It is quite apparent and clear that you have lost this debate bad. All of your ranting about us being pagans for bowing to the Kaaba is refuted."

Did I say anything about bowing to the Kaba? Or did I say KISSING THE BLACK STONE which is found at the Kaba?

Yes, Osama, please do post these exchanges unedited and without audio commentary (which is what you do when you and your guys get smoked in the debates in order to do damage control) so people can see that this is another time where you embarrassed yourself. That's why all you can do is rant and rave that you smoked this and smoked that, destroyed this and destroyed that. Your nothing but a kid.

May God have mercy on Osama's soul by helping him to turn away and abandon the pagan Muhammad and bring him to the true living Christ. He is so blind that he can't see when he is being refuted.

My advise to the rest of the bloggers is to ignore this child since he is a narcissist like Nadir who wants attention. He doesn't represent Islam and cannot deal with his opponent's arguments.

Hmmm, come to think about it, did not Jesus Christ call Peter "the rock"?

Was Peter here a metaphoric pagan god? According to your DESPERATE LOGIC, Jesus and Peter are in blasphemy!

Furthermore, the Psalms verses that I gave, TALKED ABOUT A TEMPLE BUILT FROM ROCKS. So bowing down to this body of rocks is equal if not worse!

Furthermore, YOU HAD BEEN VIRTUALLY MUZZLED on the Jesus = Allah in Islam! I've been bringing it back and back and back and you ignored it once and again, DESPITE THE FACT THAT YOU'VE WRITTEN ARTICLES ON THIS POINT!

Wouldn't you at least want to defend your points?

Man, you've been getting smoked in point after another today, haven't you?

Since Sam Shamoun ran with his tail between his legs, from the debate, I'd like to finish him off by presenting the other two verses that he gave, TO SHOW HOW ILLOGICAL AND DESPERATE he is:

Exodus 20:4-5

4 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

Numbers 21:4-9

The Bronze Snake 4 They traveled from Mount Hor along the route to the Red Sea, [a] to go around Edom. But the people grew impatient on the way; 5 they spoke against God and against Moses, and said, "Why have you brought us up out of Egypt to die in the desert? There is no bread! There is no water! And we detest this miserable food!"

6 Then the LORD sent venomous snakes among them; they bit the people and many Israelites died. 7 The people came to Moses and said, "We sinned when we spoke against the LORD and against you. Pray that the LORD will take the snakes away from us." So Moses prayed for the people.

8 The LORD said to Moses, "Make a snake and put it up on a pole; anyone who is bitten can look at it and live." 9 So Moses made a bronze snake and put it up on a pole. Then when anyone was bitten by a snake and looked at the bronze snake, he lived.

CLEARLY, THE VERSES HE GAVE ARE TALKING ABOUT IDOL GODS! The black stone in Mecca has nothing to do with this! And I already refuted him on 1 Kings 19:18 in the post above.

Clearly Sam Shamoun, who WAS SILENCED ON THE JESUS=ALLAH in Islam, despite the fact that he's written articles about it on his site, HAS LOST THIS DEBATE!

AND DON'T FORGET THAT JESUS CALLED PETER "THE ROCK". Peter being the rock or stone makes him and Jesus PAGAN GODS according to the joker, Sam Shamoun.

Thank you very much for your patience everyone. I greatly appreciate it. I truly do.

I won't selfishly hog this board for a loser like you. I must say that I truly appreciate David Wood and Nabeel Qurashi for even allowing this to happen. I further want to thank all of the readers for respecting my request to leave me and you debate this to the finish.

All of your points had been destroyed above. I therefore, won't repeat them. Your strategy is to burry the posts. Don't worry dude, I will only post YOUR POSTS and MY POSTS. So even if you attempt to make too much noise to draw everyone to jump in and flood this board with comments, IT IS SADLY TOO LATE FOR YOU. You got burried on:

1- Your Old Testament Verses that you presented.

2- On the Old Testament Prophets bowing to Temples made from stones.

3- On Jesus calling Peter "the rock". Hey, if it's as bad as you say it is, would it be APPROPRIATE THEN for David Wood to call you INFIDEL? If Peter being the "rock" isn't bad, then why should Prophet Muhammad, merely kissing the stone because it is a Miracle from Allah Almighty, a blasphemy to you?

4- Your Christians ALL OVER THE WORLD have THOUSANDS OF statues of Jesus and Mary! Are they infidels?

5- And for GOD Almighty's Sake, don't you even have the BALLS to defend your own ridiculous articles here in public???? YOU SAID THAT JESUS=ALLAH in Islam in several articles that you wrote specifically for this topic. I have muzzled your barking mouth with Noble Verse 5:17 and left you VIRTUALLY SILENT ABOUT IT! Man, talk about total humiliation!

Go on baby shampoo. Keep ranting about how paganistic Islam is. You are too desperate. You had been slaughtered like a goat on this board. Again, many thanks to David and Nabeel for allowing us, and many thanks for the audiance for not messing it up.

I can't let Osama get away with such lies and distortions. So let me go through this one more time. To begin with, the passages I cited from Exodus 20:4-5 and 1 Kings 19:18 show what idolatry is. It is kissing or bowing to any image, whether that of false gods or of creatures.

Second, the references to Numbers 21:4-9 and 2 Kings 18:1-4 show that God doesn't even allow his people to render homage or veneration to an image that he himself commanded Moses to fashion.

So what do we learn from all of this? 1. The true God would not command any of his subjects to kiss, bow down or burn incense to any object, even one that he had made. 2. It is the custom of the pagans to kiss and bow to images of creatures and false gods such as Baal, something that God abhors. Monotheists don't do these things. 3. Muhammad kissed a black stone which even troubled one of his companions.

Conclusion? Muhammad was an idol kissing pagan who pretended to be a monotheist.

How does Osama defend his stone smooching prophet? By bringing up the fact that Peter was called the Rock!!!! hehehehe!

The other day on a couple of posts you erased, you complained that "the seven spirits of God" is a phrase that appears for the first and only time in the last book of the Bible, "the book of Revelations". You also said: "I wonder if this has to do with Rome's multi-headed god. I think it does, since your whole faith is pagan-based."

In light of this, let me ask you:

Why does the Qur'an make a reference to the beast (S. 27:82)since the notion comes from a "pagan based" book and religion?

Also, why is there only one one verse from a single Surah that makes reference to "the beast"?

Semper wrote: I saw that part of your defense of Muhammad kissing the black stone included pointing out that Jesus called Peter the rock. Great reasoning. Does this mean that you believe Muhammad kissed Peter?

Outright brilliant question! I was planning to respond to that, but my reply wouldn’t have been as brilliant as this one.

And who said that Muhammad wasn’t an idol worshipper? He kissed Peter in reverence and all his stooges have been imitating his idolatrous example ever since.

«COUNTLESS idols of Jesus and Mary all over the Christian world! The Roman Catholics even bow and/or kneel to these idols. SO ARE THEY PAGANS TO YOU?»...

that was going to fare... I felt personaly offended... but then I reallized it was YOU who was speaking and I realised this just mighte be a foonie assertion bie the moste foonie muslim apologiste around...

so... the sense of being offeded turner to a sense of foon... I even started laughing... what a clownesc argument!!!

there are no idols in catholics churches... there are imeges of Jesus and Miriam and many other saints... but no person bows or knees to the images... they bow to God Onlie that is someow represented by (not in) the images os Jesus, our God; and to God represented by (not in) in the images of those who loved Him in a special way...

in any case they bow, knee (although I woulde rather they did not make those manifestations if thei were not aware off the profound meam«ning of theire actions...) to, and only, to GOD who is represented by the images due...

this is not what happened to Muhammede in the black rock... no where it was said thatte allah was presented in a special way in that pisse of black matterial... no where allah saide he was presented in that rock... and do you believe that that rock representes allah (the analogie with Jesus... being him God...) or someone in whomm allah was specialy presentede (the analogie with Mary and the saints...)?

About your analogie with Peter (... which I found peculiarly offensive...) here's what an ex-muslim wrote (these are not mie words... make sure off that... I promised not to exange sexual themes with you Osama in respect about your true/false past...):

when the hadiths say that Muhammad was much more virille than the common men (Bukhari (5:268) - "The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number." I asked Anas, 'Had the Prophet the strength for it?' Anas replied, 'We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty men.' ") , and so admiting that he had, as it's promised to happen in heaven to muslims (unan Ibn Majah 4337-- It was narrated from Abu Umamah that the Messenger of Allah said: "There is no one whom Allah will admit to Paradise but Allah will marry him to seventy-two wives, two from houris and seventy from his inheritance from the people of Hell, all of whom will have desirable front passages and he will have a male member that never becomes flaccid (i.e., soft and limp)."), an umoungous erection as a rock, was it allowed to people bow and kiss it? or when Muhammad's wifes permormed oral sex (bowing and kissing him...) with him, they were making him a pagan god?... (sorrie about the analogie... no intention to be rudd...)

are there idols in xiia shrines, all of them full of images of the deafs imans?

so, in sintesis:

a) no catholique bows or knees to images but rather to God who was, as He said, himself special presented in the personns represneted in them... more in the case of Jesus being Him God... (was allah ever specialy presented in the black rock? did allad ever said he was specialy presented in it?...)

b) the analogie with Peter is offensive to Christians... it shows onlie that you are here to offend us... and it's completely out of sense...

c) are xiias being idolatrres? woul you, here, call them so? or would you say they are not muslims?

be carefull Osama with your arguments... they are of no use to the cause off islam...

I am still shaken by Abdallah's methodology and analogy, particularly comparing Peter being metaphorically the Rock with the actual kissing of a black meteorite (an arabic ancient object of worship).

We do not read anywhere that Peter accepted worship of himself, kissing (except possibly a holy kiss) and people bowing toward himself, quite the opposite. As to a kiss it may in many cultures simply reveal respect to a person, hence a kiss is not necessarily an act of worship. However when you kiss an object (such as the black stone) that commonly was known as an object of worship (and the ancient people commonly worshipped meteorites that fell from the sky), this is an act of worship.

The bowing toward the temple in Jerusalem cannot be used as an example in itself either, as Jews did not bow to or worship the temple the temple, or it stones as Osama proposes but to what that temple represented.

It is interested however, when we consider that the early Israelites used to bow to what the temple represented.

The temple contained the ark of the covenant where the God of Israel manifested himself among the nation.

We might say that it was that particular manifestation they had in mind when they bowed toward it.

As to the Kaaba, the black meteorite and the fact that more than a billion muslim bow toward it everyday, I will agree that a similar idea is being practiced.

However, rather than bowing toward the manifestation of God, the Kaaba has an entirely different manifestation, namely the black stone and what it originally stood for.

Muslims ussually state that the black stone fell down from heaven, I hope they are not referring to God's heaven; in that case the heaven consists of pretty natural material. And not to forget it would be a long way down.

If on the other, the stone is a meteorite another problem comes up, namely that it was common practice of the ancient people to ascribe divinity to stones that fell down from the sky and build a house of worship aside or over it. Just take the famous meteorite of Ephesus as an example among others.

These stones were actually worshipped as gods.

This implies that the Kaaba was not built by Adam or Abraham but by ancient Arabic polytheist who followed the ancient practice and built the Kaaba to venerate a divine object that fell from heaven.

The very fact that Muhammad cleared the Kaaba off idols yet still venerated the black stone of the Kaaba and kissed it, reveals an act of worship, a veneration for a pagan object of worship, which logically makes us suspicious that Islam is not free of idolatry.

That the closest followers of Muhammad were uneasy about Muhammad kissing the stone simply confirms this suspicion.

This may suffice to say that Muslims today when they bow toward Mecca may have Allah in mind, however, considering why the Kaaba was built, considering that the stone (an ancient object of worship) plays an important role of it and considering that Muhammad the founder of Islam kissed the stone, suggests that being a active is 'ignorant polytheism'.

1- If the word itself was that bad, then why did Jesus call Peter as such?

2- I gave the example of David Wood for instance calling Shamoun, a Christian like him, an INFIDEL. Would be appropriate?

Whether Peter was called a rock or not, doesn't change a thing. The kissing of Baal in 1 Kings 19:18 that Shamoun gave, IS NOT THE SAME AS KISSING THE MIRACLE that Allah Almighty Sent down. Just as baal the rock, is not the same as Peter the rock.

Whether Peter was called a rock or not, doesn't change a thing. The kissing of Baal in 1 Kings 19:18 that Shamoun gave, IS NOT THE SAME AS KISSING THE MIRACLE that Allah Almighty Sent down. Just as baal the rock, is not the same as Peter the rock.

Elijah replies:

The black stone is not a miracle from Allah its a meteorite!

And yes, obviously, since the ancient trend venerated meteorites as gods, kissing the black stone and kissing baal is one and the same thing.

Muhammad ought to have removed that thing from the Kaaba much like he removed the three daughters of Allah and all 360 idols.

This becomes a matter of interest, or concern, Muhammad:

1) enouraged the worship of three idols

2) venerated a centre of polytheism, that originally was built to venerate a meteorite idol

3) kissed a polytheistic object of worship much to the amazement of his own followers

I encourage muslims to be slightly more critical that Uthman and the rest of the early followers. Who were concerned about the matter but still decided to follow Muhammad's practice of venerating the stone.

Another matter of concern to the Muslims should be the originality of this practice; it did not follow as a later addition, the original islam itself compromises with polytheism.

Every muslim who follows the example of Muhammad and kisses that stone or bows into its direction is practicing 'ignorant polytheism'.

Osama: all your dubius argumente is supported bye your dubius statement that tha black rocke is a «MIRACLE that Allah Almighty Sent down»...

do you suppose everie naturall ocurrance that happens in Mecca is a miracle from allah? rain? sun? window? a person brething and breeding?

now we see howe you are a muslim due to your beliebe in the absolutely dubius AMAIZING MIRACLES OF THE qUR'AN...

hey: sura 2 follows sura 1: an amaizing miracle; the paper in wich the qur'an is writene is solid: another amuzing miracle; the letters impressed in the paper don't follow downe from it: another amaizing miraclle...

why did muslims destroi hindu shrines where people adored similar objects? just because in those places Muhammad did not feel the necessity to kiss theme? or simply because muslims apologists did not feel the urge to defende the indefensable in those shrines bie saying it WAS A MIRACLE FROM aLLAH?

how low can muslim apology descend... to sad...

Osama: I do not mix persons whith their actions: I'm nott saying you're anerror, rather saying you're, ounce again, inerror... I do not like your actions, but trully love you as a good person I see you're... the things you believe are not your falte... they're lies otheres put in you...

And what about the "TRINITY IN ISLAM" that Shamoun talked about in several articles on his site?

Shamoun said that even in the Holy Quran, Jesus is GOD Almighty. I silenced Shamoun with Noble Verse 5:17.

Any response by any Christian on this point? Or will it remain a sound defeat to shamoun and his deceiving articles?

Elijah replies:

I don't see how you can silence anyone with Sura 5: 17.

I know you muslim are commanded by your own book to believe the previous revelations as they appeared in Muhammad's time. But we Christians are not commanded to believe the Qur'an. Hence the reference of Sura 5: 17 is of no significance.

The verse states that Allah is not the son of a Mary, a human.

But if you look at next verse Allah speaks to the Jews and Christians saying:

...You are but men, -- of the men he has created.

The problem is that Jesus was not created by men, according to the particular passage therefore Jesus is not like other humans.

In fact Jesus was not born by a virgin simply to reveal a sign from God! Such would make no sense! He was born by a virgin because of who he is. Because who he is does not require a human creator.

Does this not somehow relate to the Qur'anic statement that Jesus is the Word of Allah and a spirit proceeding from them.

As far as I am aware of these are not original Arabic ideas. They come from the Greek world and the Bible, from the Gospel of John.

And in whatever way you intend to interpret this sentence, does it not seem odd that the Qur'an in one particular passage refers two of the most familar words of the time related to Trinity.

I mean if Allah was aware off, that Christians associated Jesus to the Word, the Logos, the intermediate divine function and mind between God and his world, why on earth would Allah refer to Jesus as the Word of Allah?

Was it because Allah spoke Jesus into being? The passage does not even indicate that!

Nothing even explicitly indicates that Jesus is the Word of Allah since Allah spoke him into being. The only understanding you may get from the passage is if you consider what the Christians were referring at that present time.

And how about the Spirit that proceeds from Allah (read John 14-16). Does it not seem odd that since Christians worldwide (in the known world) at the time of Muhammad understood that the Spirit proceeded from God, and then Allah in the Qur'an simply utilizes the same phrase upon Jesus, who in John 14 will proceed with the Spirit to the believers and who in John 16 proceeded from God.

This obviously is not a coincident, whoever wrote this was fully aware of the typical Christian terminology of the time, yet lacked the insigt into its meaning.

This whole idea of three gods is completely absent from the Christian mindset.

It reveals again that the author of the Qur'an misunderstood Christian doctrine, this is the only matter muslims should be concerned about, yet instead muslims today continually seek to enforce upon us this misunderstanding of our religion.

It does not matter how much we correct them, since they presume that the Qur'an is from, their misunderstanding is simply correct and the facts must then be wrong.

Hey folks, let's have some more fun with Osama's appeal to Peter. As Elijah mentioned Peter didn't accept worship. He actually stopped someone from showing him reverence:

"As Peter entered the house, Cornelius met him and fell at his feet in reverence. But Peter made him get up. 'Stand up,' he said, "I am only a man myself.'" Acts 10:25-26

Thus, Osama's example further mitigates against him since it shows that what Muhammad did by kissing a pagan idol stone was idolatry since the Rock that followed Jesus wouldn't allow anyone to show him such reverence. So why did Allah enjoin upon his followers the idolatrous veneration of his "gift" or "miracle" rock when Jesus' Rock refused it?

"Was it because Allah spoke Jesus into being? The passage does not even indicate that! "

Not only is this position not supported by the text, it is completely illogical. Since this would mean that when Allah made the grass in the fields, this would mean that the grass in the fields is the Word of Allah. You can take any object for that matter. This argument is totally useless!

You said: "I know you muslim are commanded by your own book to believe the previous revelations as they appeared in Muhammad's time. But we Christians are not commanded to believe the Qur'an. Hence the reference of Sura 5: 17 is of no significance."

MY RESPONSE:

Your response is desperate. Never once were we Commanded to believe in your corrupt scriptures. There are ample Noble Verses and Hadiths that say your bible is corrupt.

To the reader, please visit: www.answering-christianity.com/warning.htm

AND

www.answering-christianity.com/Deuteronomy4_2.htm TO READ THE AMPLE ISLAMIC QUOTES THAT I PRESENTED.

But at any rate, notice everybody how Hogan didn't answer Noble Verse 5:17. He instead went around it. Sam Shamoun got hosed during the debate above, which will be posted this weekend insha'Allah, on "ISLAM DOES ALSO BELIEVE IN A TRINITY":

[005:017] Those who said that the Messiah, (Jesus), son of Mary is God Himself (or god incarnate) have indeed committed a sacrilege. Say, “Does anyone possess even a bit of power to do anything against Allah? What if He wants to destroy the Messiah, (Jesus) son of Mary, his mother and all the living beings on the surface of the earth? The heavens and the earth and all else in between belong to Allah. He creates what He wills, and Allah is able to will everything!”

Hogan, nice try on doing damage control, but it didn't help you. Your trinity has no existence in Islam and shamoun got silenced on this point along with the many other points that we discussed.

The black stone was a heavenly astroid that was sent by Allah Almighty to determine the location of the Kaaba to be built by Abraham and his son Ishmael, peace be upon him. Hence, it is not a pagan idol stone.

People worshiping it before Prophet Muhammad came, and people defiling the Kaaba with idols doesn't turn it into a pagan idol.

Your response is desperate. Never once were we Commanded to believe in your corrupt scriptures. There are ample Noble Verses and Hadiths that say your bible is corrupt.

To the reader, please visit: www.answering-christianity.com/warning.htm

AND

www.answering-christianity.com/Deuteronomy4_2.htm TO READ THE AMPLE ISLAMIC QUOTES THAT I PRESENTED.

Elijah replies:

As I have said before, I do risk entering your virus loaded website.

Could you please post here the verse in the Qur'an that says:

'The Christians globally corrupted the Injeel by writing'

Go ahead post the passage, but how then you do explain all these passages in the Qur'an:

It is He who sent down to thee (step by step), in truth, the BOOK, CONFIRMING WHAT WENT BEFORE IT; and He sent down the Torah (of Moses) and the Gospel (of Jesus) (Sura 3:3)

“If you Muhammad are in doubt regarding that which we have revealed to thee, ask THOSE who READ the BOOK from BEFORE YOU” (Sura 10:94).

Hast thou not turned thy thought to those who have been given a PORTION OF THE BOOK? They are invited to the Book of Allah, to settle their dispute, but a party of them turn back and decline (Sura 3:23)

...whom they find written in the Torah and the Gospel that IS WITH THEM (Sura 7:156-157)

“Say, O people of the book! You are not founded on anything until you PERFORM the TORAH and the GOSPEL, and what was revealed to you from your Lord” (Sura 5:68-71)

The Messenger believeth In what hath been revealed to him from his Lord, as do the men of faith, each one (of them) believeth in Allah, His angels, HIS BOOKS, and His messenger. “WE MAKE NOT DISTINCTION (they say) between one and another of his messengers.” And they say: “We hear, and we obey: (we seek) Thy forgivness, our Lord, and to Thee is the end of all journeys” (Sura 2:285)

Be courteous when you argue with People of the Book except with those among them who do evil. Say: “ We believe in that which is revealed to us and which was revealed to you. Our God and your God is one”. (29:46)

O ye who believe! Believe in Allah and his Messenger, and the SCRIPTURE WHICH HE SENT TO HIS MESSENGER, AND the SCRIPTURE WHICH HE SENT TO THOSE BEFORE (HIM). Any who denieth Allah, His angels, His BOOKS, His messengers, and the day of judgement, hath gone fare astray (Sura 4:136)

And there are many more, I am happy to look at the context if you care.

Why are there so clear pointers in the Qur'an that the Jews, Christians and Muslims, including Muhammad are to believe in the previous revelations as they appeared, were read and followed by the Jews and the Christians in Muhammad's time, and virtually no passage that states that the Injeel was corrupted by writing?

Osama wrote:

But at any rate, notice everybody how Hogan didn't answer Noble Verse 5:17. He instead went around it. Sam Shamoun got hosed during the debate above, which will be posted this weekend insha'Allah, on "ISLAM DOES ALSO BELIEVE IN A TRINITY":

Elijah replies:

Are you not the one going around my reply.

I provided you logical answers with a number of pointers, context and further Qur'anic explanation.

How in wide world can you categorize my response in that manner?

I have responded in every better than you.

Osama wrote:

[005:017] Those who said that the Messiah, (Jesus), son of Mary is God Himself (or god incarnate) have indeed committed a sacrilege. Say, “Does anyone possess even a bit of power to do anything against Allah? What if He wants to destroy the Messiah, (Jesus) son of Mary, his mother and all the living beings on the surface of the earth? The heavens and the earth and all else in between belong to Allah. He creates what He wills, and Allah is able to will everything!”

Hogan, nice try on doing damage control, but it didn't help you. Your trinity has no existence in Islam and shamoun got silenced on this point along with the many other points that we discussed.

Elijah replies:

Why don't read my reply to you again.

You can't simply expect me to take you serious by simply avoiding the information I gave you and then post a number of words, and then claim that I failed to contribute anything to the debate.

Can you explain from its context why the Qur'an refers to Jesus as teh Word of Allah and a Spirit proceeding from Allah?

The passage does not say that JEsus was created by a word of God, or by the Spirit of God. It clearly indicates that Jesus 'is' the word and the Spirit!

You have failed miserably to present anything of significance here.

And you running away and then claiming victory hardly convinces anybody.

Your people had corrupted the true Religion of Allah Almighty, which is why you are constantly spinning around yourselves trying to define what trinity is; a word that doesn't even exist in your book.

Elijah replies:

Well some God you believe in Osama, he can't even protect his own word and religion. If anything applies here it is the warning of the Bible that false prophets and false religons will arise, much like islam.

As to the Trinity, I think it has been well attested by now, that the only faction here misunderstanding the definition of Trinity is the author of the Qur'an itself and those who adhere to his word.

The black stone was a heavenly astroid that was sent by Allah Almighty to determine the location of the Kaaba to be built by Abraham and his son Ishmael, peace be upon him. Hence, it is not a pagan idol stone.

People worshiping it before Prophet Muhammad came, and people defiling the Kaaba with idols doesn't turn it into a pagan idol.

Elijah replies:

I guess you are referring to a meteorite an asteroid is ussually several kilometers in size.

The only problem is that while meteorites burn while entering the earth atmosphere many meteorite have fallen on the earth. What makes the rest of these any less divinely appointed?

You are indeed right that these were often considered a sign from the gods were a temple ought to be built, however, the particular object was ussually also worshipped.

Since you cannot provide any evidence that the particular stone was placed their by God, we can only consider the ancient community and its trend.

There is simply no evidence that Allah located that spot for his temple in the presence of Adam by sending a stone from the sky; the only information we have is that black stones of this kind frequently impacted the earth and the ancient community used to worship these and surround them or attach them by a temple.

Interestingly it is from these very same stones that the ancient community considered iron to fall down from space, and that space was very much iron; does that not refute your whole idea, about the iron wall, namely that Allah sent down the iron as being a scientific prediction in the Qur'an, well interestingly Allah also sent down the cattle; I wonder if they (the cattle) just dropped down from the sky or whether they were placed down here by UFO's.

Gents, here is a love letter from Osama to Shamoun, posted with Shamoun's permission:

Sam Shamoun (ben malik),

Look forward to my article on you this weekend, insha'Allah. The readers are going to love it. It further exposes what kind of a clown you truly are. And yeah, please keep spreading your lies about how I was sexually abused during my youth. Quite honestly, seeing it being repeated by you many many times already (in the past and just recently), it really makes me wonder if you are truly either go raped when you were young, or you've suffered much abuse in your youth. Because otherwise, why would it even come across your mind to fabricate such lies on people like this, as we have documented many of them on you already?

Osama Abdallahwww.answering-christianity.com

Even here you can see how starts manifesting as he accused me, a.k.a. Shamoun, of saying he was raped. As many of the bloggers noted I never said sch a thing. Osama mentioned it and exposed himself in the process. Poor fool. hehehe

Osama,Your people had corrupted the true Religion of Allah Almighty, which is why you are constantly spinning around yourselves trying to define what trinity is; a word that doesn't even exist in your book.

We don't need to define it until foolish thinkers pompously proclaim falsehoods regarding the true God. The Trinity was formulated against the backdrop of a false understanding of God's nature that was being propogated by heretics. And it was only 300 years later that we see another heretic making a similar claim, and we see this today with yourself and your cohorts. The sad thing is, at least Arius understood what the Trinitarians were saying, Muslims nor Muhammad know nothing of it, and still display their ignorance.

Btw, I dont play games Osama. I answer fools according to their folly.

You said above: "Someone who knew some history about Osama says that he had a troubled past growing up, something with his uncle. That event has severely affected his emotional and mental state. You can see it in his fascination with sex in the Bible and trying to find it in every place or verse he can."

Not only did you lie about someone knowing history about me, but like we've exposed you at:

www.answering-christianity.com/dumpster_section.htm

where you repeatedly kept saying that we (the Muslims who were speaking with you via email) got raped in the past, and since you're bringing this lie up here again, then I HONESTLY AND HONESTLY AND HONESTLY have to wonder if you truly got raped or suffered sexual abuse in your youth. THIS WAS NO MERE ONE COMMENT FROM YOU. No, this has repeated several times already, and it keeps coming up by you.

As to me fascinated with sex because I quote your Bible's ridiculous pornography, the problem is not with. The problem is with your Bible. When I, for instance, read verses such as:

Song of Songs 8:1-3 "If only you were to me like a brother, who was nursed at my mother's breasts! Then, if I found you outside, I would kiss you, and no one would despise me. I would lead you and bring you to my mother's house-- she who has taught me. I would give you spiced wine to drink, the nectar of my pomegranates. His left arm is under my head and his right arm embraces me."

And when I ask simple questions about how could this verse THAT CLEARLY SPEAKS ABOUT AN INCESTUOUS FANTASY, or at least she would look lustfully at her biological brother if he were too sexy, and the Bible praises this, be A DIVINE REVELATION from GOD Almighty, then I am not being a pervert. I am just being an unbiased normal reader.

If you're so ashamed of your bible, then that's your problem. Don't charge me with sexual perversion for merely quoting your Holy Scriptures. And certainly, you lying and saying that I and other Muslims got raped and suffered sexual abuses makes it quite clear THAT THERE IS SOMETHING QUESTIONABLE ABOUT YOUR PAST.

OR Sam Shamoun, perhaps that you are a sexual predator who preys on women, OR AT LEAST YOU PROBABLY DO FANTASIES ABOUT RAPING EITHER WOMEN OR CHILDREN WHEN YOU play with yourself, since you're a lone loser anyway.

I honestly and very seriously have some serious concerns regarding you.

Just wondering: What does it matter if somebody here endured sexual abuse or rape in their childhood? There's nothing to say that you will undoubtedly end up sexually obsessed if you suffer abuse as a child. That's not to say it can't happen, but it's just not often the case. There are other repercussions that proceed it.

But really, I just want to know why it's relevant to the conversation at all; and if it's not true, why take offense to it? People won't (or shouldn't) hold things against you if you were violated during childhood. Then again, I've witnessed the heartlessness of people who dish out accusations towards the victims (e.g., "She was probably dressing promiscuously and enticed him!" or "The kid's lying; he just wants attention.").

In my opinion, personal attacks should be left out of doctrinal discussions since it's so easy to initiate barbaric name-calling. Then, observing this behavior, a random onlooker may assume that Christians, Muslims, etc. are each crude and immature. It doesn't portray a good image for either side. (But that's just my take on it.)

Osama… since you have some problem with Song of Songs 8:1-3… here whate I explained before to you… no wonder you’re gettingue the fame off being someone with some kind off problemes… I’ll prayingue for you!!!

The problem, I guess, his youre totallie lack off knoledge of the semitic value off the word "ha"... iff you knew it, you woulde see how ridiculous is youre positionne and understand whie no one didn'te eben needed to unser you... is that your best shotte? Poor sold... I'll be prayieng eben more for you...

It's like somme a colour-blind person saying in courte, after a car crash, when viewing a colour tape of his crash with the light cleralie in red: «the light was green!!!»... No one needed to say anything... they're sorrie for him... but then the judge would say: you're mistaken...

I'll show you whie: the masculine noun "ha" may referr to brother of blood, half-brother, close relatives AND milk-brothers (someonne from other familye who was fead with someone's other mother breast milk... as it was common with the son of princesses...)... it's clearlie this late the case in this text:

a) it's a poemme about a girl and a boy withe totallie different economic backgrounds...;

b) the girl his dreamming of an intimacie to the boy simmilar off the one milk-brothers habe (raised together since childhood...);

c) they crearlie doesn't habe the same mother... that's whie she sais: «bring you to my mother's house»... not «OUR mother’s house»… which would be eben more suitteded to the structure of the poem…;

d) no where is an incestuous relattion pointed outt here… so, the factt that she desires the boi to habe a tast of her’s vaginal fluid (bie the waie: where in the world does women habe semen? Perhaps in muslims countries… or it was a “lapsus linguae” that expressed, Usama, your more incontious desiresof drinking semen? Onlie you can saie…) -- «the nectar of my pomegranates» has YOU saide… -- doesn’t represent a probbleme… also in islam women fluid (“madhiy”) is not inpure… but that’s not the case: the word yoy say it means vagina is navel… so sad for you…

But iff you want another schoolar explanation, please read: Tremper Longman's "Song of Songs", p. 203 where he explains that the onlie reason the girll wanted to be the boy's sister was to be hable to kiss him like brothers in public without shame... she does not wantt to be her sister to have incestuos relations with him... see also Larry L. Lyke's "I Will Espouse You Forever: The Song of Songs and the Theology of Love in the Hebrew Bible"...

Osama... ounce again: forget about the fact you were raped (or not...)... it was YOU who brought this worde to this thread and made notice that someone had said thate about you... if YOU haven't done so, no one woulde ever know... I'll be playing for you!!!

You are as filthy and ridiculous as Sam Shamoun (ben malik). He invented the lie about not just me, but several other Muslims, of getting raped, and you swallowed his lie whole.

Was this out of mere foolishness or desperation?

As to your other post, where did I say that she had sex with her brother? The Biblical verses are clear, and my post was also clear. Your bible praises her inappropriate sexual comment about WISHING THAT HE WAS HER BROTHER.

I thought that Shamoun was the biggest liar here, but you seem to be like him.

Did not Shamoun (ben malik) say this:

"Someone who knew some history about Osama says that he had a troubled past growing up, something with his uncle. That event has severely affected his emotional and mental state. You can see it in his fascination with sex in the Bible and trying to find it in every place or verse he can."

He clearly was referring to RAPE, and as I mentioned, if you visit:

www.answering-christianity.com/dumpster_section.htm

You'll see several recordings about him TELLING MUSLIMS HOW THEY GOT RAPED BY THEIR UNCLES AND OTHERS!

Now you being a good christian makes you a professional word-gamer. You're used to twisting and perverting words, as you've done with Song of Songs 8:1-3 that clearly promotes pornography.

"Ousama: sorrie to have been unoticed of youre probleme... I also had a difficult childhood: I only had mie first book when I was 12... that's when I started learning how to read and write... and now I can anderstand and writte (sometimes bery bad as with mie english...) in 12 idioms... so, Osamma, our bad experiences in the past had unitied us eben more..."

No thank you! Stay as far a way from me as possible! I don't want to be united with you. You're no more than a tool that SICK SEXUAL PERVERTS LIKE SHAMOUNT use.

Shamoun, in many times, referred to rape. This is nothing to you? You say it because you're a notorious liar like him. WOULD YOU HONESTLY TRUST YOUR CHILD WITH HIM? A guy who always talks about rape?

I don't bother even to debate or provoke you when you are in that mood.

I have no clue which of you two started what. But you and Shamoun need to have a serious and healthy talk together. Otherwise debating will be based on anger and hate and prove futile.

Now if any of you have been sexually misused as youngsters, this should not be taken lightly; that is an area of life that needs healing and should not be thrown back and forward as an insult on forum like this.

Please tell that to Sam Shamoun (ben malik) who constantly talks about rape. I am not the one who does. I only exposed him here on it.

In http://www.answering-christianity.com/dumpster_section.htm tons of recordings about his foul mouth speaking about this thing: RAPE.

Ask any psychologist and he'll tell you that being a vicitm of something would cause you to be OBSESSED WITH IT. And since Shamoun is obsessed with talking about rape, then I have to wonder if he had problems of this sort in his youth.

Another point worth mentioning is that Sam Shamoun has no respect or regard to anyone, especially his fellow believers. What type of a street trash would openly and constantly insult his opponents with lies about them getting raped?

Whith ben malik's initial wordes no one coulde ever imagine that he was talking aboute rappe... we onlie knew you had problems with youre unclle... nothing more...

that's what I intended to say... it was YOU who oppened the Pandora's box saying he was talkin about rappe...

about Song 8:1-3... whishing thate someone could be my brodder/sister (that's teh contexte...) so I could kiss him/she in public is not inceste... other persons, willing to habe sex to anothers person's wife, would habe recieved a special revelation from allah... not every one can falsiffy and desrespect God like that...

and yes... you're my brother... so I love you, and chare, whith you my deepests feelings: I also had a bery baf childwood: I was born in Philippines and my familie was forced to conbert to islam in order not to be kiled in trhe souther provine of Davao... we onlie escaped to freedom manie years latter and returned to the true religion of Jesus...

trust me, my goof friende Osama: I know what you're deeling with... forget about it and life youre life with an open butt strong heart!!! Jesus loves you!!! And mie prayers are with you!!!

If Sam Shamoun's (ben malik) comment and lie about me got abused by my uncle and that has effected me so bad that it made me OBSESSED WITH SEX does not mean that he was referring to rape, then I have no idea what kind of a human being are you, if your kind, besides you, even exists on this planet?

AND YOU SPINELESS HYPOCRITE AND COWARD, how about commenting on the DIRECT RAPE RECORDINGS that we have on this filthy street-trash Sam Shamoun? Again, visit:

Someone who knew some history about Osama says that he had a troubled past growing up, something with his uncle. That event has severely affected his emotional and mental state. You can see it in his fascination with sex in the Bible and trying to find it in every place or verse he can.

#2: he did note, as you falsely claim, comment and lie about me got abused by my uncle...

#3: as Alforreca said: one canne habe sexual obcession (and I'm not saying you do... nowadays onlie you and your wife can say...) without habing been rapped...

#4: I'm a well informed persson who don't misxture "K" with "O" just because I'm afraide to be "KO"...

#5: I wente to your site... exceptionaly... I'm afraid of beinga attacked ounce again bie trojans... where's the proof that "ben malok" is "Sam Shamoun"?... even if he's, if you haven't posted the link to your site and satarted talking about rape, no one would habe known about that!!!

#6: if you have been raped no one shoulde be making it public unless you habe done it before... if you havent, no one should say you habe... in bothe cases that was not a correct actione... and I don't like tose things, and I'm sure Jesus is not...

I won't speek about this anymore: it was you who, ounce again, pushed me into it...

my preyeras are with you and with your uncle (if he rapped you, so he can repent; if not, so he cann habe is named clened...)...

You said that Christianity corrupted the true religion of Allah and Islam came along to restore it.

Could you prove that there was this thing called "Islam" before Christianity and Judaism corrupted it? Could you point me to this "original" Islam so that I might compare it to "restored" Islam and see if you aren't just pulling my chain?

stephanie, osama, hogan, et al, i myself was the victim of terrible physical and emotional abuse as a child. at nine i was molested by a neighbor, and then thereafter i was serially abused. i spent my adolescence either on the streets of stockton, sacramento, san francisco, as chicken meat, or in the california youth authority.

there is no shame in being a victim osama. if you need someone to talk with, i would be willing to dialog with you privately. the psychological effects of sexual abuse can be like a sleeping lion, and no one can acurately predict how or when one might begin to exhibit the trauma in socially inappropriate behaviors and attitudes.

i am proud to say that i have been blessed to be able to counsel with many young and not so young men, both professionally, and as an avocation (as a member of aa/na). i may not ever be of much help, but i feel that i have been a compassionate ear, and a reliable resource for men in serious psychological pain. if nothing else i want folks to know that just because you were abused as a child, you don't have to live with the secret, and exposing the secret can free you to begin to learn how to have meaningful relationships, with both men and women.

osama, you don't have to love Christians, but you may be able to have dialogs with folks without having to resort to such continuous infantile and abusive comments. your willingness to be so abusive to others in word is indicative of an unawareness of appropriate communication skills and tools. when a person is so willing to be abusive in their comments one has to wonder at their psychological fitness.

Peace to all who bow the knee to Jesus Christ, our Lord, our God, our Savior, and our King

I second your comments. Every thread Osama gets involved in, gets dragged unabashadly off-topic and the conversation degrades into insults (not to mention the fact that no matter what the topic is, Osama finds a way to interject specific Bible verses that he has a problem with). I gave up on trying to follow all the way through the thread. Too many insults, too much mud-slinging, and I'm not interested in listening to Osama air his personal feud with Sam Shamoun.

My personal opinion is that Osama's presence here is not good for this blog (but then again that's just my opinion).

You said: "Ask any psychologist and he'll tell you that being a vicitm of something would cause you to be OBSESSED WITH IT."

I wholeheartedly disagree with that assessment on the grounds that:

(1) Unless you conform to Freud's psychoanalytic theory (which, aside from the fundamentals, has long since been discredited), victims of sexual assault or abuse are usually resilient if they have family support, counseling, or cope properly with their emotions.

(2) When I was younger, I was victimized and I am most certainly not obsessed sexually. It has caused me to appreciate the work of law enforcement officers, victims advocates, crisis counselors, etc. Personal experience has given me the incentive to become involved in those fields (although preceding the incident, my interests were pretty much the same). Despite the fact that I am passionate about and empathetic towards those who were involved in similar situations, I am certainly no sexual deviant.

(3) It never works to generalize side effects of victimization. There are a few correlations between certain behaviors and being previously violated, however if it's one thing I've learned in psychology, it's that correlation does not prove causation. (But I'm not some pseudo-psychologist who thinks that, after one year, she's an expert in that subject. I'm just stating a couple of statistics.)

(Just so you know, I am not personally attacking you--I just strongly, deeply disagree with your above statement.)

On yet another note to Mr. Fernando who said, "Stephanie... good duck for your exam!!! I'll be praying fore you!!!"

I appreciate your prayer, and thank you very much! It was a long and stressful night, but I did succeed in completing my exam. (I'm not so satisfied with the grade I got on the exam--which was a B--but my final grades are all A's, so that's good enough for me.)

To ubiquitouserendipity, too bad that you got badly raped in your youth. It's interesting that you are the fifth Christian mentioning his sad past on this board. What? Do all Christians come from dumpsters? What type of families were guys raised in?

As to Sam Shamoun, I FIRST OF ALL LOVE HOW HE INCLUDED GEORGE SEIGE AND HIS WIFE'S EMAILS IN HIS REPLY TO ME. That truly took the cake! In case you don't know who George is, he is the President of Ministry to Muslims. So obviously, Sam Shamoun doesn't give a toilet about any Christian. So this is indeed a big slap on the face TO ALL OF THOSE LOSERS WHO CONTINUE TO DEFEND HIM ON THIS BOARD.

And as to his lies on Muslims getting "raped", here is what this foul-mouthed street loser, Sam Shamoun, said in these captured recordings to Muslims:

1- From http://www.answering-christianity.com/shamoun_hooked_on_gay-rape.mp3

"I know that being gay... looking forward to the gulman the young boys TO RAPE YOU... it turns you off when someone is large"

Now, given Sam Shamoun's foul behaviour and manner, we can all imagine what he meant by "LARGE".

osama said: "To ubiquitouserendipity, too bad that you got badly raped in your youth. It's interesting that you are the fifth Christian mentioning his sad past on this board. What? Do all Christians come from dumpsters? What type of families were guys raised in?"

i said: wow!!! really, that's what you got from my post? okay.

Mat 6:23 But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!

may His Light shine in your heart someday.

by the way, my father was a very violent man, it had nothing to do with religion. in my father's case, a little ol' time religion might have saved a family or more. i know you can't answer, so i'll let it go here.

Peace to all who bow the knee to Jesus, our Lord, our G d, our Savior, and our King

I wouldn't take that particular comment to heart; sexual deviants and abusive individuals don't discriminate. You and I both know that Christians aren't the only ones who experience these types of situations.

It's very comforting to know that despite hardships, people can still find comfort in our Lord and Savior. I've seen so many people go down the wrong path, so I'm so glad to see that you (among many others here and elsewhere), after enduring so much, chose Christ! God bless you and thank you (in addition to all the others here) for sharing your testimony.

The only insult on this thread is so far from Osama, not from Ben Malik or Sam Shamoun.

Yet Osama goes baserk and hurls all types of insults on Shamoun and other Christians.

We raised a number of arguments against Islam on this thread and Osama simply avoided these issues.

1. We pointed out that the Qur'an indeed indicates Trinity.2. We pointed out that the Qur'an credits the Bible.3. We pointed out that the kaaba and the black stone originally were objects of idol worship.4. We pointed out unscientific claims of the Qur'an.

Meanwhile we:

5.responded to all the arguments of Osama

6. Revealed Osama's ridicolous methodology such as Peter's Rock being an analogy to the black stone in the kaaba.

Osama was simply unable to deal with all of this, I wonder if his tantrum originates from his failure to reply and even possible the spark of doubt over islam rooted in his mind.

Also it seems to me that Osama's main motive is to mock, insult or expose, hence his wording 'my readers will love this, etc...'

Also I am amazed that when a number of Christians try to encourage Osama telling him that they experienced incidents of abuse as children, Osama goes straight for the same tactic and abuse he accuses Shamoun off and asks these individuals, what kind of families they were born in and somehow picturizes chold molestation as part of Christian households.

I don't intend to generalize. But Osama said he has communicated with a number of Christians who were raped as children, hence Christianity must permit the rape of Children.

The problem is I myself have never met a child who was molested in a Christian family (I am sure there are but then of course I question the faith of the particular rapist) I have met a few who are Christians but were raped in a non-Christian setting. On the other hand I have met people who were raped as children by muslims.

Osama also targets Christianity due to the pedofile priests. The problem is, you move to any Muslim country and you will find that rape of young boys is very common within the mosques; check it out for example in Pakistan and India, people there are aware of the problem. It simply does not receive the same media attention.

However, based upon all this, I do not generalize all muslims as rapists or Islam as a child molesting religion in the same sense. Even though we know that in Islam there is freedom to rape female slaves, rape captive slaves and marry and have sex with little girls, probably also in Muttah marriages.

But still I would not say rape is common in all Muslim families and all mosques.

I'm deeply sorry to the outcomme of all what happened... a moderatted blog blockes the possibility to an fluide exchange of opiniones... to sad... all the posts in onne thread should bee limited to the topic ore in directe conection of it...

I agree that this is a sad outcome. Whenever a post about the Trinity ultimately devolves into a rant about molestation and pedophilia, you can be sure that Osama Abdallah is involved.

Interestingly, Ibn is following in Osama's footsteps and modeling his approach after him. Right after I enabled "comment moderation," Ibn repeatedly tried to post a comment suggesting that my father had molested me (never happened) and that this is the reason I offer arguments against Islam. (Somehow, according to Ibn, Islam takes the place of my molesting father in my mind.)

Think about how deluded Ibn must be! Islam commands Muslims to fight everyone who doesn't submit to Muhammad's teachings. Islam attempts to destroy Christianity and Judaism. Islam destroys free speech and basic human rights. People are suffering around the world because of Islam. So why do people criticize it? It must be because these critics were molested!

This is absolutely repulsive. I don't recall engaging Ibn or anyone else in this obscene fashion, so I find it astounding that he's leading out with personal attacks like this. It is a mark of true desperation (and it even happened after Nabeel asked him to post some meaningful comments for once).

My father died of a heart attack a little over two months ago. But his death doesn't bother me nearly as much as the death of rational discourse that took place when Muhammad started winning followers. We see the fruit of Islam on this blog.

It's interesting that some Muslim apologists are willing to team up with and support people like Ibn and Osama. I think it says something about the direction Muslim apologetics is headed.

David said: "It's interesting that some Muslim apologists are willing to team up with and support people like Ibn and Osama. I think it says something about the direction Muslim apologetics is headed."

Yeah. Unfortunately I think it's only going to get worse. Imagine a worst case scenario where a Shabir Ally is replaced by a Nadir Ahmed, a Sami Zaatari or an Ibn (I shudder at the thought).

The effectiveness of IEEE Project Domains depends very much on the situation in which they are applied. In order to further improve IEEE Final Year Project Domains practices we need to explicitly describe and utilise our knowledge about software domains of software engineering Final Year Project Domains for CSE technologies. This paper suggests a modelling formalism for supporting systematic reuse of software engineering technologies during planning of software projects and improvement programmes in Final Year Project Centers in Chennai.

Spring Framework has already made serious inroads as an integrated technology stack for building user-facing applications. Spring Framework Corporate TRaining the authors explore the idea of using Java in Big Data platforms. Specifically, Spring Framework provides various tasks are geared around preparing data for further analysis and visualization. Spring Training in Chennai

Women in Islam

American Freedom Law Center

America

The Truth about CAIR

FAQ Page

On this website, we engage Muslims and the foundations of Islam without trying to be "PC". We feel honesty is better than disguised language. As you can read on our FAQ, this is out of love, not out of hatred. Thanks, and we're looking forward to seeing your comments!